LITTLE ROCK (AP) — Arkansas elections officials overstepped their authority by rejecting petitions for a proposed ballot measure that would grant a Texas businessman the exclusive rights to operate casinos in seven Arkansas counties, his attorney told the state Supreme Court on Thursday.

The businessman, Michael Wasserman, is hoping to win more time to circulate petitions for his proposed constitutional amendment to make November’s ballot, after the state secretary of state’s office rejected his initial effort after finding that he had not turned in enough signatures.

John Harmon, an attorney for Wasserman, said the state went beyond the raw count of overall signatures required to get a measure on the ballot by checking to see if he had met a minimum number in 15 counties.

“If this court rules to the contrary, you have established the secretary of state as the most powerful constitutional officer in Arkansas,” said Harmon. “Because if the court upholds their position in this case, they’ll be more powerful than the governor, than anybody else in this state, because they can just say ‘well, you failed to initiate because I looked at the deal and you didn’t make a prima facie case.”’

Wasserman has argued Martin’s office improperly rejected his petitions when it said he didn’t meet a requirement that signatures from at least 15 counties equal at least 5 percent of the votes cast in the last governor’s election. He fell short in Prairie, Saline and Woodruff counties.

Proposed amendments need signatures from at least 78,133 registered voters to qualify for the ballot. Wasserman has argued that he only needed to clear an initial count of the numbers, not in the 15 counties, to qualify for more time.

Deputy Secretary of State A.J. Kelly told the court that after denying the petitions, election officials determined that the vast majority of signatures submitted by Wasserman were not valid. Election officials said that only 11,065 signatures submitted were valid. Kelly said Wasserman has already missed the 30-day window to challenge that finding and submit more petitions.

“The issue in this case is moot because they don’t have a sufficient number of signatures,” Kelly said.

The state and opponents of the measure have argued that Wasserman doesn’t have standing to sue since he’s not an Arkansas voter. They also argue that the 15-county standard is not a new one and has been applied in the past.

Elizabeth Murray, an attorney for opponents of the casino proposal, said state law gives election officials power to reject blatantly invalid signatures before going through a more detailed verification process.

“I think it applies when you can, on the face of the petitions, see that it’s not casinos being gamed, it’s our initiative system,” Murray said.

Justices did not indicate when they’d rule in the case, the second lawsuit before the court on a casino legalization proposal. The court on Thursday agreed to hear oral arguments in professional poker player Nancy Todd’s lawsuit against the state over her competing casino amendment.

Todd’s proposal would give her exclusive rights to operate casinos in four Arkansas counties.

Wasserman told reporters after the hearing that he believed he could gather the additional signatures needed to get on the ballot if given more time by the court.

“We have people in place that are ready to hit the ground,” Wasserman said. “We don’t have an issue with getting enough signatures.”